DOCSLIB.ORG

September 14, 2010

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
September 14, 2010 REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES September 14, 2010 The Judicial Conference of the United States convened in Washington, D.C., on September 14, 2010, pursuant to the call of the Chief Justice of the United States issued under 28 U.S.C. § 331. The Chief Justice presided, and the following members of the Conference were present: First Circuit: Chief Judge Sandra L. Lynch Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf, District of Massachusetts Second Circuit: Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs Chief Judge William K. Sessions III, District of Vermont Third Circuit: Chief Judge Theodore A. McKee Chief Judge Harvey Bartle III, Eastern District of Pennsylvania Fourth Circuit: Chief Judge William B. Traxler, Jr. Judge James P. Jones, Western District of Virginia Fifth Circuit: Chief Judge Edith Hollan Jones Judge Sim Lake III, Southern District of Texas Judicial Conference of the United States September 14, 2010 Sixth Circuit: Chief Judge Alice M. Batchelder Chief Judge Solomon Oliver, Jr., Northern District of Ohio Seventh Circuit: Chief Judge Frank H. Easterbrook Chief Judge Richard L. Young, Southern District of Indiana Eighth Circuit: Chief Judge William Jay Riley Judge Rodney W. Sippel, Eastern District of Missouri Ninth Circuit: Chief Judge Alex Kozinski Judge Charles R. Breyer, Northern District of California Tenth Circuit: Chief Judge Mary Beck Briscoe Judge Robin J. Cauthron, Western District of Oklahoma Eleventh Circuit: Chief Judge Joel F. Dubina Judge Myron H. Thompson, Middle District of Alabama District of Columbia Circuit: Chief Judge David Bryan Sentelle Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth, District of Columbia 2 Judicial Conference of the United States September 14, 2010 Federal Circuit: Chief Judge Randall R. Rader Court of International Trade: Chief Judge Jane A. Restani The following Judicial Conference committee chairs attended the Conference session: Circuit Judges Bobby R. Baldock, Julia Smith Gibbons, Michael S. Kanne, M. Margaret McKeown, Jeffrey S. Sutton, and Richard C. Tallman, and District Judges Julie E. Carnes, Rosemary M. Collyer, Janet C. Hall, Robert L. Hinkle, D. Brock Hornby, George H. King, Mark R. Kravitz, Barbara M.G. Lynn, J. Frederick Motz, Donald C. Pogue, Michael A. Ponsor, Julie A. Robinson, Lee H. Rosenthal, Charles R. Simpson III, George Z. Singal, and Laura Taylor Swain. Bankruptcy Judge Rosemary Gambardella and Magistrate Judge Anthony J. Battaglia were also in attendance, and Collins Fitzpatrick of the Seventh Circuit represented the circuit executives. James C. Duff, Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, attended the session of the Conference, as did Jill C. Sayenga, Deputy Director; William R. Burchill, Jr., Associate Director and General Counsel; Laura C. Minor, Assistant Director, and Wendy Jennis, Deputy Assistant Director, Judicial Conference Executive Secretariat; Cordia A. Strom, Assistant Director, Legislative Affairs; and David A. Sellers, Assistant Director, Public Affairs. District Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein, Director, and John S. Cooke, Deputy Director, Federal Judicial Center, and Judith W. Sheon, Staff Director, United States Sentencing Commission, were in attendance at the session of the Conference, as was Jeffrey P. Minear, Counselor to the Chief Justice. Scott Harris, Supreme Court Counsel, and the 2010-2011 Supreme Court Fellows also observed the Conference proceedings. Acting Deputy Attorney General Gary Grindler addressed the Conference on matters of mutual interest to the judiciary and the Department of Justice. Senators Patrick Leahy and Jeff Sessions spoke on matters pending in Congress of interest to the Conference. 3 Judicial Conference of the United States September 14, 2010 REPORTS Mr. Duff reported to the Conference on the judicial business of the courts and on matters relating to the Administrative Office (AO). Judge Rothstein spoke to the Conference about Federal Judicial Center (FJC) programs, and Chief Judge Sessions, in his capacity as Chair of the United States Sentencing Commission, reported on Sentencing Commission activities. Judge Gibbons, Chair of the Committee on the Budget, presented a special report on the budget outlook. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RESOLUTION The Judicial Conference approved a recommendation of the Executive Committee to adopt the following resolution recognizing the substantial contributions made by the Judicial Conference committee chairs whose terms of service end in 2010: The Judicial Conference of the United States recognizes with appreciation, respect, and admiration the following judicial officers: HONORABLE DONALD C. POGUE Committee on Audits and Administrative Office Accountability HONORABLE BARBARA M. G. LYNN Committee on the Administration of the Bankruptcy System HONORABLE JULIE E. CARNES Committee on Criminal Law HONORABLE CHARLES R. SIMPSON III Committee on International Judicial Relations HONORABLE LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules 4 Judicial Conference of the United States September 14, 2010 HONORABLE ROBERT L. HINKLE Advisory Committee on Rules of Evidence Appointed as committee chairs by the Chief Justice of the United States, these outstanding jurists have played a vital role in the administration of the federal court system. These judges served with distinction as leaders of their Judicial Conference committees while, at the same time, continuing to perform their duties as judges in their own courts. They have set a standard of skilled leadership and earned our deep respect and sincere gratitude for their innumerable contributions. We acknowledge with appreciation their commitment and dedicated service to the Judicial Conference and to the entire federal judiciary. JUDICIARY STRATEGIC PLANNING In 2008, with the permission of the Chief Justice, the Executive Committee formed an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee on Judiciary Planning to propose a new planning process for the federal judiciary. The group, which was comprised of current and former Conference committee chairs and members of the Executive Committee, as well as court executives, also took on the role of developing a new strategic plan that would potentially replace the Long Range Plan for the Federal Courts adopted by the Conference in 1995 (see JCUS-SEP 95, pp. 38-63). After two years of work and extensive consultation within the judiciary, in August 2010, the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee proposed a strategic plan that was intended to serve as a broad action agenda addressing judiciary trends, issues, challenges, and opportunities. Beginning with restatements of the vision, mission, and core values of the judiciary, the plan identifies seven key issues and sets forth 13 strategies and more than 30 goals by which the judiciary could address those issues. The Ad Hoc Advisory Committee also made several recommendations with regard to an approach to planning. On recommendation of the Executive Committee, and after discussion, the Judicial Conference approved the proposed Strategic Plan for the Federal Judiciary, as well as a recommended approach to planning, both with minor changes recommended by the Executive Committee on the Conference floor. With regard to the planning approach, the Conference agreed that— 5 Judicial Conference of the United States September 14, 2010 a. The Executive Committee chair may designate for a two-year renewable term an active or senior judge, who will report to that Committee, to serve as the judiciary planning coordinator. The planning coordinator will have responsibility to facilitate and coordinate the strategic planning efforts of the Judicial Conference and its committees. b. With suggestions from Judicial Conference committees and others, and the input of the judiciary planning coordinator, the Executive Committee will identify issues, strategies, or goals to receive priority attention over the next two years. c. The committees of the Judicial Conference will integrate the Strategic Plan for the Federal Judiciary into committee planning and policy development activities. d. For every goal in the Strategic Plan, a mechanism to measure or assess the judiciary's progress will be developed. e. Any substantive changes to the Strategic Plan will require the approval of the Judicial Conference, but the Executive Committee will have the authority, as needed, to approve technical and non-controversial changes to the Strategic Plan. A review of the Strategic Plan will take place every five years. f. The new Strategic Plan for the Federal Judiciary will supersede the December 1995 Long Range Plan for the Federal Courts as a planning instrument to guide future policy-making and administrative actions within the scope of Conference authority. This action, however, should not be interpreted as an across-the-board rescission of the individual Conference policies articulated in the recommendations and implementation strategies of the earlier plan. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS The Executive Committee — • Approved a statement on behalf of the Conference in reaction to pending legislation – as it related to the judiciary – that would have clarified the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO’s) ability to 6 Judicial Conference of the United States September 14, 2010 enforce its existing authority to see records and expanded its interview authority, as well as its power to make and retain copies of agency records; and endorsed pursuit of formal protocols for GAO’s interactions with the judiciary; • Declined to recommend action by the Judicial Conference on a request for Conference review of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Empirical Study of the Ideologies of Judges on the Unites States
    JUDGED BY THE COMPANY YOU KEEP: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE IDEOLOGIES OF JUDGES ON THE UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS Corey Rayburn Yung* Abstract: Although there has been an explosion of empirical legal schol- arship about the federal judiciary, with a particular focus on judicial ide- ology, the question remains: how do we know what the ideology of a judge actually is? For federal courts below the U.S. Supreme Court, legal aca- demics and political scientists have offered only crude proxies to identify the ideologies of judges. This Article attempts to cure this deficiency in empirical research about the federal courts by introducing a new tech- nique for measuring the ideology of judges based upon judicial behavior in the U.S. courts of appeals. This study measures ideology, not by subjec- tively coding the ideological direction of case outcomes, but by determin- ing the degree to which federal appellate judges agree and disagree with their liberal and conservative colleagues at both the appellate and district court levels. Further, through regression analysis, several important find- ings related to the Ideology Scores emerge. First, the Ideology Scores in this Article offer substantial improvements in predicting civil rights case outcomes over the leading measures of ideology. Second, there were very different levels and heterogeneity of ideology among the judges on the studied circuits. Third, the data did not support the conventional wisdom that Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush appointed uniquely ideological judges. Fourth, in general judges appointed by Republican presidents were more ideological than those appointed by Democratic presidents.
    [Show full text]
  • March 12, 2013
    REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES March 12, 2013 The Judicial Conference of the United States convened in Washington, D.C., on March 12, 2013, pursuant to the call of the Chief Justice of the United States issued under 28 U.S.C. § 331. The Chief Justice presided, and the following members of the Conference were present: First Circuit: Chief Judge Sandra L. Lynch Judge Paul J. Barbadoro, District of New Hampshire Second Circuit: Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon, Eastern District of New York Third Circuit: Chief Judge Theodore A. McKee Judge Joel A. Pisano,1 District of New Jersey Fourth Circuit: Chief Judge William B. Traxler, Jr. Chief Judge Deborah K. Chasanow, District of Maryland 1Designated by the Chief Justice as a substitute for Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster, Western District of Pennsylvania, who was unable to attend. Judicial Conference of the United States March 12, 2013 Fifth Circuit: Chief Judge Carl E. Stewart Chief Judge Sarah S. Vance, Eastern District of Louisiana Sixth Circuit: Chief Judge Alice M. Batchelder Chief Judge Thomas A. Varlan, Eastern District of Tennessee Seventh Circuit: Chief Judge Frank H. Easterbrook Judge Ruben Castillo, Northern District of Illinois Eighth Circuit: Chief Judge William Jay Riley Judge Rodney W. Sippel, Eastern District of Missouri Ninth Circuit: Chief Judge Alex Kozinski Judge Robert S. Lasnik, Western District of Washington Tenth Circuit: Chief Judge Mary Beck Briscoe Judge Dee V. Benson, District of Utah Eleventh Circuit: Chief Judge Joel F. Dubina Judge W. Louis Sands, Middle District of Georgia 2 Judicial Conference of the United States March 12, 2013 District of Columbia Circuit: Chief Judge Merrick B.
    [Show full text]
  • Choosing the Next Supreme Court Justice: an Empirical Ranking of Judicial Performance†
    Choosing the Next Supreme Court Justice: † An Empirical Ranking of Judicial Performance Stephen Choi* ** Mitu Gulati † © 2004 Stephen Choi and Mitu Gulati. * Roger J. Traynor Professor, U.C. Berkeley Law School (Boalt Hall). ** Professor of Law, Georgetown University. Kindly e-mail comments to [email protected] and [email protected]. Erin Dengan, Édeanna Johnson-Chebbi, Margaret Rodgers, Rishi Sharma, Jennifer Dukart, and Alice Kuo provided research assistance. Kimberly Brickell deserves special thanks for her work. Aspects of this draft benefited from discussions with Alex Aleinikoff, Scott Baker, Lee Epstein, Tracey George, Prea Gulati, Vicki Jackson, Mike Klarman, Kim Krawiec, Kaleb Michaud, Un Kyung Park, Greg Mitchell, Jim Rossi, Ed Kitch, Paul Mahoney, Jim Ryan, Paul Stefan, George Triantis, Mark Seidenfeld, and Eric Talley. For comments on the draft itself, we are grateful to Michael Bailey, Suzette Baker, Bill Bratton, James Brudney, Steve Bundy, Brannon Denning, Phil Frickey, Michael Gerhardt, Steve Goldberg, Pauline Kim, Bill Marshall, Don Langevoort, Judith Resnik, Keith Sharfman, Steve Salop, Michael Seidman, Michael Solimine, Gerry Spann, Mark Tushnet, David Vladeck, Robin West, Arnold Zellner, Kathy Zeiler, Todd Zywicki and participants at workshops at Berkeley, Georgetown, Virginia, FSU, and UNC - Chapel Hill. Given the unusually large number of people who have e-mailed us with comments on this project, it is likely that there are some who we have inadvertently failed to thank. Our sincerest apologies to them. Disclosure: Funding for this project was provided entirely by our respective law schools. One of us was a law clerk to two of the judges in the sample: Samuel Alito of the Third Circuit and Sandra Lynch of the First Circuit.
    [Show full text]
  • President Bush's Judicial Nominations During the 101St and 102Nd
    Order Code 93-395 President Bush’s Judicial Nominations During the 101st and 102nd Congresses Updated March 29, 1993 Denis Steven Rutkus Specialist in American National Government Government Division President Bush’s Judicial Nominations During the 101st and 102nd Congresses Summary There are ten categories of courts (including the local courts of the District of Columbia) to which the President nominates judges. The following report provides background and statistics concerning President Bush’s judicial nominations in each court category as well as actions taken on those nominations by the United States Senate. Each of the report’s ten sections discusses the composition and jurisdiction of the court in question and notes the committee to which nominations to this court were referred when received by the Senate. Also, statistics on judicial nominations received by the Senate during the four years of the Bush Presidency are presented, including the following: ! Overall number of persons nominated, confirmed, and not confirmed to the court in question; ! Number of President Bush’s nominees currently sitting on the court; ! Breakdowns, for both the 101st and 102nd Congresses, of the number of nominations received by the Senate, confirmed, or failing to receive Senate confirmation. At the end of each section, a table lists President Bush’s pertinent court nominations during the 101st and 102nd Congresses, including nomination dates, hearing dates, dates reported out of committee, and dates of confirmation or other final Senate action. Contents Introduction ......................................................1 Nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States....................5 Nominations to the U.S. Courts of Appeals..............................7 Nominations to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Courts of the United States
    66 U.S. GOVERNMENT MANUAL of Decisions, the Librarian, the Marshal, Court Term The term of the Court the Director of Budget and Personnel, begins on the first Monday in October the Court Counsel, the Curator, the and lasts until the first Monday in Director of Data Systems, and the Public October of the next year. Approximately Information Officer. 8,000 cases are filed with the Court in Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate the course of a term, and some 1,000 jurisdiction has been conferred upon the applications of various kinds are filed Supreme Court by various statutes under each year that can be acted upon by a the authority given Congress by the single Justice. Constitution. The basic statute effective at this time in conferring and controlling Access to Facilities The Supreme Court jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may is open to the public from 9 a.m. to 4:30 be found in 28 U.S.C. 1251, 1253, p.m., Monday through Friday, except on 1254, 1257–1259, and various special Federal holidays. Unless the Court or statutes. Congress has no authority to Chief Justice orders otherwise, the change the original jurisdiction of this Clerk’s office is open from 9 a.m. to 5 Court. p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Rulemaking Power Congress has from Federal legal holidays. The library is time to time conferred upon the open to members of the bar of the Court, Supreme Court power to prescribe rules attorneys for the various Federal of procedure to be followed by the departments and agencies, and Members lower courts of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Ideologies of Law Clerks and Their Judges
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics Economics 2016 The olitP ical Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges Adam Bonica Adam S. Chilton Jacob Goldin Kyle Rozema Maya Sen Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/law_and_economics Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Adam Bonica, Adam S. Chilton, Jacob Goldin, Kyle Rozema & Maya Sen, " The oP litical Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges" (Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics No. 754, 2016). This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Political Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges Adam Bonica, Adam Chilton, Jacob Goldin, Kyle Rozema, & Maya Sen∗ February 29, 2016 We study the political ideology of judicial law clerks using a novel dataset that combines the most comprehensive data sources on political ideology and the identity of U.S. federal law clerks. First, we examine the distribu- tion of clerks' ideology and find that clerks tend to be disproportionately liberal, with clerks on lower courts being more liberal on average than clerks for higher courts. Second, we find that judges tend to consistently hire clerks with similar ideologies and that those ideologies track available measures of the judge's own ideology.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fight for the Supreme Court Is Just Beginning
    The Fight For The Supreme Court Is Just Beginning Sean McElwee Huff Post, 10/25/2018. Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court caught the attention of progressives. (BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI via Getty Images) Brett Kavanaugh is an associate justice of the Supreme Court, his confirmation solidifying a five-vote majority for the court’s extreme conservatives. Progressives are bracing themselves for the effects of a fully empowered right-wing court, and so they should. Yet most Americans are unaware of how deeply the court has already damaged American society, even without a conservative majority. Over the past two decades, the extremist court has resegregated schools, made it easier for abusive cops to avoid punishment, weakened protections for survivors, poisoned children, empowered racist vote suppressors and even thrown elections ― including the presidency ― to the Republican Party. Now, the limited restraints offered by Justice Anthony Kennedy have disappeared, and the threat is even greater. There is, however, one difference between the past two decades and now: Progressives are finally paying attention. The right, knowing that its agenda is deeply unpopular, has turned to the courts to override the popular will. The Supreme Court has rarely been a force for progress. In its most famous and popular decisions — such as Brown, Griswold and Obergefell — the court largely hedged its bets and acted after social movements had already paved the way. It has rarely acted, much less acted effectively, without support from the legislative and executive branches. Of course, the court can and sometimes does promote progressive change, but it’s a narrower avenue for change than many people assume.
    [Show full text]
  • September, 2011
    REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES September 13, 2011 The Judicial Conference of the United States convened in Washington, D.C., on September 13, 2011, pursuant to the call of the Chief Justice of the United States issued under 28 U.S.C. § 331. The Chief Justice presided, and the following members of the Conference were present: First Circuit: Chief Judge Sandra L. Lynch Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf, District of Massachusetts Second Circuit: Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon, Eastern District of New York Third Circuit: Chief Judge Theodore A. McKee Judge Harvey Bartle III, Eastern District of Pennsylvania Fourth Circuit: Chief Judge William B. Traxler, Jr. Judge James P. Jones, Western District of Virginia Fifth Circuit: Chief Judge Edith Hollan Jones Chief Judge Sarah S. Vance, Eastern District of Louisiana Judicial Conference of the United States September 13, 2011 Sixth Circuit: Chief Judge Alice M. Batchelder Judge Thomas A. Varlan, Eastern District of Tennessee Seventh Circuit: Chief Judge Frank H. Easterbrook Chief Judge Richard L. Young, Southern District of Indiana Eighth Circuit: Chief Judge William Jay Riley Judge Rodney W. Sippel, Eastern District of Missouri Ninth Circuit: Chief Judge Alex Kozinski Judge Robert S. Lasnik, Western District of Washington Tenth Circuit: Chief Judge Mary Beck Briscoe Judge Robin J. Cauthron, Western District of Oklahoma Eleventh Circuit: Chief Judge Joel F. Dubina Judge Myron H. Thompson, Middle District of Alabama District of Columbia Circuit: Chief Judge David Bryan Sentelle Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth, District of Columbia 2 Judicial Conference of the United States September 13, 2011 Federal Circuit: Chief Judge Randall R.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2021
    Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 3/3/2021 International Trade United States Court of International Trade Timothy Reif 0 1st Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Jeffrey R. Howard 0 Kermit Victor Lipez (Snr) Sandra L. Lynch Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson United States District Court District of Maine D. Brock Hornby (Snr) 0 Jon David Levy George Z. Singal (Snr) Nancy Torresen John A. Woodcock, Jr. (Snr) United States District Court District of Massachusetts Allison Dale Burroughs 0 Denise Jefferson Casper Timothy S. Hillman Mark G. Mastroianni George A. O'Toole, Jr. (Snr) Michael A. Ponsor (Snr) Patti B. Saris F. Dennis Saylor Leo T. Sorokin Richard G. Stearns Indira Talwani Mark L. Wolf (Snr) Douglas P. Woodlock (Snr) William G. Young United States District Court District of New Hampshire Paul J. Barbadoro 0 Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 3/3/2021 Joseph N. Laplante Steven J. McAuliffe (Snr) Landya B. McCafferty United States District Court District of Puerto Rico Francisco Augusto Besosa 0 Pedro A. Delgado Hernandez Daniel R. Dominguez (Snr) Jay A. Garcia-Gregory (Snr) Gustavo A. Gelpi, Jr. United States District Court District of Rhode Island Mary M. Lisi (Snr) 0 John J. McConnell, Jr. William E. Smith 2nd Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Joseph F. Bianco 0 Jose A. Cabranes Guido Calabresi (Snr) Denny Chin Christopher F. Droney (Ret) Peter W. Hall Pierre N. Leval (Snr) Raymond J. Lohier, Jr. Gerard E. Lynch (Snr) Jon O. Newman (Snr) Barrington D.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical News
    The Historical Society of the U. S. Courts in the Eleventh Circuit 11th Circuit Historical News Volume XII, Number 3 http://sites.google.com/site/circuit11history Winter 2015 A marvelous life: The Story of Judge Peter T. Fay By Deborah J. Gander Editor’s note: This article is based on a two-day interview of Judge Fay conducted by Dean C. Colson and Deborah J. Gander in December 2014. Peter Thorp Fay describes his his brother, Jim, was two-and- life as one of “happy accidents,” a-half years younger. Pete led which fairly communicates that a happy life, unaffected by the his life has been both charmed deep poverty he, his family and in ways that seem almost so his country were struggling far-fetched they could only be through in those years. fiction, yet also peppered with “Everyone was poor,” he said, so devastation, disappointment and he thought nothing of it. “You sometimes deep-seated fear. literally lived on pennies, and Judge Fay has lived through the nickels and dimes.” times that defined our nation over His father moved the family nearly the past century, and he to one of three homes on Rio has been shaped by these events Vista Isles, now the location in amazing ways. Each of these of multimillion-dollar homes events inevitably led to the next but back then just a remote series of encounters; had even one area of Fort Lauderdale that been missing, might the whole the neighborhood paper boy story have turned out differently? did not want to service. So the Fay’s life began Jan.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Courts of the United States
    68 U.S. GOVERNMENT MANUAL include the Administrative Assistant to of procedure to be followed by the the Chief Justice, the Clerk, the Reporter lower courts of the United States. of Decisions, the Librarian, the Marshal, Court Term The term of the Court the Director of Budget and Personnel, begins on the first Monday in October the Court Counsel, the Curator, the and lasts until the first Monday in Director of Data Systems, and the Public October of the next year. Approximately 8,000 cases are filed with the Court in Information Officer. the course of a term, and some 1,000 Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate applications of various kinds are filed jurisdiction has been conferred upon the each year that can be acted upon by a Supreme Court by various statutes under single Justice. the authority given Congress by the Access to Facilities The Supreme Court Constitution. The basic statute effective is open to the public from 9 a.m. to 4:30 at this time in conferring and controlling p.m., Monday through Friday, except on jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may Federal legal holidays. Unless the Court be found in 28 U.S.C. 1251, 1253, or Chief Justice orders otherwise, the 1254, 1257–1259, and various special Clerk’s office is open from 9 a.m. to 5 statutes. Congress has no authority to p.m., Monday through Friday, except on change the original jurisdiction of this Federal legal holidays. The library is Court. open to members of the bar of the Court, Rulemaking Power Congress has from attorneys for the various Federal time to time conferred upon the departments and agencies, and Members Supreme Court power to prescribe rules of Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Courts of Appeals
    UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS First Judicial Circuit (Districts of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, and Rhode Island).—Chief Judge: Jeffrey R. Howard. Circuit Judges: Juan R. Torruella; Sandra L. Lynch; O. Rogeriee Thompson; William J. Kayatta, Jr.; David J. Barron. Senior Circuit Judges: Bruce M. Selya; Michael Boudin; Norman H. Stahl; Kermit V. Lipez. Circuit Executive: Susan J. Goldberg (617) 748–9614. Clerk: Margaret Carter (617) 748–9057, John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse, One Courthouse Way, Suite 2500, Boston, MA 02210. Second Judicial Circuit (Districts of Connecticut, New York [Eastern, Northern, Southern,´ and Western], and Vermont).—Chief Judge: Robert A. Katzmann. Circuit Judges: Jose A. Cabranes; Susan L. Carney; Denny Chin; Christopher F. Droney; Peter W. Hall; Dennis Jacobs; Robert A. Katzmann; Debra A. Livingston; Raymond J. Lohier, Jr.; Rosemary S. Pooler; Reena Raggi. Senior Judges: Giudo Calabresi; Amalya L. Kearse; Pierre N. Leval; Gerard E. Lynch; Jon O. Newman; Barrington D. Parker, Jr.; Robert D. Sack; Chester J. Straub; John M. Walker, Jr.; Richard C. Wesley; Ralph K. Winter. Circuit Executive: Karen Greve Milton. Clerk: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe (212) 857–8700, Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, NY 10007–1581. Third Judicial Circuit (Districts of Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virgin Islands).— Chief Judge: D. Brooks Smith. Circuit Judges: Theodore A. McKee; Thomas L. Ambro; Michael A. Chagares; Kent A. Jordan; Thomas M. Hardiman; Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr.; Thomas I. Vanaskie; Patty Shwartz; Cheryl Ann Krause; L. Felipe Restrepo; Stephanos Bibas. Senior Judges: Walter K. Stapleton; Morton I. Greenberg; Anthony J.
    [Show full text]